Merchant Archive

---

hirosue wrote:

So what should we do keep merchant till we sell evfery last bit of stock and only the drop it ?

---

We should get the Devs to fix the bug and have your vendor disappear when you unlearn. YOUcould then choose if you wait to give up the skill so you can sell items, or you can remove the items from your vendor and store them elsewhere, or you can leave them in the vendor to be destroyed.

There is no reason why you should be able to keep the benefit of a skill after you give up the skill. Imagine if you could still make armor after dropping armorsmith or use a flamethrower after dropping commando.

I'm sure SOE doesn't want us to retain vendors after dropping the skills that gave us those vendors in the first place. But SOE probably doesn't have an elegant way to address the issue right now. If they had it so that if you delete a skill then you loose a vendor how would that work? Which vendor? What would happen to the vendor contents? They'd have too many people get burned by it because they don't realize they're going to loose their vendor stocked full of stuff by deleting the skill. What they need to do is require you to remove the vendor first before you can drop the skill.

---

Orew wrote:

you will keep them... bug or not, I don't think that it will be ever fixed - people who gave up merchant long ago have hundreds of items in their vendors and no other place to store them, there will be too much screaming

no matter what the devs intended to do, after so many months since release it has become "the expected behavior"

personally, i believe it's not a bug... remember, the skill it's called "Hiring", not "Keeping" vendors. In the description of the skill you see the words "placing vendors"... To keep them it should be enough to pay maintenance.

and yes, I am a master merchantand I'm not planning to give it away.

---

*shrug* The 'rules lawyering' about this subject has been done to death. If you'd take that stance, consider also the 'placing' of the merchant tent. Once placed it cannot be transfered to someone without the necessary skill, though it has already been 'placed'- though I am not entirely sure what happens to a merchant tent should the holder surrender the necessary skill.

This differentiation of 'hiring' versus 'keeping' isa prime examplerules lawyering to the extreme. People try to keep them seperate and hence try to use the wording of the tooltip to justify what is essentially quasi-exploitation. To place a vendor is to imply use of vendor; no one 'places' a vendor and never 'uses' (saving for those folks who are lazy stockists, but that is a seperate issue) - it so to try seperate the two terms in order to justify the exercise is weak. To place and to use is the same thing as far as I am concerned; thus the retention of vendors after dropping of necessary skills to maintain them is a bug.

Try this for a mental exercise - if the wording said "Allows for use of additional vendors" would there be any real justification for vendor retention post skill surrender? Would it stand to reason, at all? If this was the wording would people argue that people should be allowed to have more vendors than their vendor skill?

No.

So their entire argument is based on a single grammatical choice. Which, given SOE's track record (Master Carbinier, anyone?) is hardly concrete. Bottom line - it stands to reason it makes no sense to allow skills and benefits to stick around after skill drop, yet people cling to a single word for dear life.

I've seen people try to argue that weaponsmith's gun's or armoursmith's armour don't disappear when they surrender, why should merchant's vendors disappear?Frankly that is a flawed and weak comparison. Merchants don't 'produce' vendors as an output of their profession - vendors are the essence of the merchant. Vendors to merchant is akin to /healDamage to Medics. It's core.

Cheers,

Ker'shakk

The tired old responses from the Merchant mafia .

Im going to keepvendors and barks, i earned them , i am not going to throw away all the time and resources i spent making the stuff to put on them , just because i dropped merchant.

Likewise i am not going to sell off my stuff cheap for 6000 each on the bazaar , just because the merchant mafia have a bugbear about it .

The system is not bugged , it works perfectly well for all who , master merchant and drop it .

Stop crying about this topic and find something more usefull to lobby about , say broken quests , or bugged schematics , you know the sort of in game stuff that really matters

Lol, then why can't I still use my FWG5? After all, I earned the exp, so I should be able to keep using it, even after I dropped Pistol and Marksman. And why can't I keep playing the mandoviol and the narlagon as well? I earned that exp, too.....

And who are you to decide what really matters and what doesn't?

(And you aren't going to keep them, so get used to it....)

I'mnot a frequenter of this forum so I'm sorry if what I'm about to say has been said a hundred thousand times (which I'm sure it has) but:

What if people who drop down the merchant tree keep their vendors but lose the ability to add items for sale on them if they have too many up? That would encourage them to take down any extra vendors without summarily dumping all the contents in to the vacuum of space.

Alternatively it should keep you from dropping skills until you have less vendors than you can handle at a lower level. But that's probably harder to implement.

Just a couple ideas that, like I said, I'm sure you've all seen a thousand times. /shrug

---

OrionsByte wrote:

What if people who drop down the merchant tree keep their vendors but lose the ability to add items for sale on them if they have too many up? That would encourage them to take down any extra vendors without summarily dumping all the contents in to the vacuum of space.

---